I wonder what the explanations are for 18, most people killed the robots. Assumption of backups? Or caring about your own species more?
Absurd Trolley Problems
81–90 of 951 posts
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#82Except the “you can’t see the track” one I suppose :P
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
I selected that one. Not because I'm particularly selfless, but because I think it's morally wrong to throw the switch whenever doing so amounts to killing someone, even when inaction results in more death.
What if the switch is a hair-trigger movement sensor, so you must stand very still not to trigger it? Which one is "inaction" now, purposefully standing very still, or acting as you would have otherwise?
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that so hard to believe? There are innumerable stories of people sacrificing themselves for other people. Everything from throwing oneself onto a grenade to having kids.
Quoted post unavailable.
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#85>Oh no! Due to a construction error, a trolley is stuck in an eternal loop. If you pull the lever the trolley will explode, and if you don't the trolley and it's passengers will go in circles for eternity. What do you do? 50% of people pull the lever?!? I hereby declare that if I'm ever going to be stuck in a trolley for my entire life, I do NOT want the lever pulled. Toss me a smartphone charger and my life wouldn't…
If it's stuck for eternity, I think there is enough time to ask the stuck person what they want.
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#86Level 20 was weird. It was a choice between letting a trolley run as normal ("emits CO2, kills 3 people in accidents over 30 years") or running it into a brick wall and decommissioning it. For some reason more people picked the latter. So, they just dislike public transit? What about the emissions and death rate when everyone switches to cars instead? Goes to show how easily the context and exact wording of a questio…
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#87I wonder what the explanations are for 18, most people killed the robots. Assumption of backups? Or caring about your own species more?
Chickens are sentient. Would you have changed your answer if it were chickens? I chose to save the human as the prompt didn't set a bar for the level of sentience. Also partly because of shameless speciesism. I love animals, have gone mostly vegetarian, but I would still save a human over any other animal.
That’s actually a very good point, I made more assumptions than the text gave cause for.
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#88Level 20 was weird. It was a choice between letting a trolley run as normal ("emits CO2, kills 3 people in accidents over 30 years") or running it into a brick wall and decommissioning it. For some reason more people picked the latter. So, they just dislike public transit? What about the emissions and death rate when everyone switches to cars instead? Goes to show how easily the context and exact wording of a questio…
This seems to take place in a hypothetical universe with an overabundance of trolleys.
Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#89Re: Absurd Trolley Problems
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
How you going to eat buddy? You want the explosion option, or the starve to death option?
I didn't see anything in that prompt that said someone couldn't toss me my lunch while I pass by.